CDR Kerchner (Ret)'s Blog

February 10, 2016

Help Stop The Constitutionally Ineligible Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio

Help Stop The Constitutionally Ineligible

Ted Cruz & Marco Rubio – Elex Sign Petitions – Click on Image

Stop The Constitutionally Ineligible Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio

Stop The Constitutionally Ineligible Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio – Read and Sign the Petitions.  Click on Image for More Details.

# # # #

CDR Charles Kerchner (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org

Marco Rubio Fails Three Legged Stool Test for "natural born Citizen". Click on Image for Details.

Marco Rubio Fails Three Legged Stool Test for “natural born Citizen”. His Parents Not U.S. Citizens. Click on Image for Details.

P.S. Here is a chart which lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution.
P.P.S. Being a “born Citizen” or “Citizen at Birth” is not identically the same as a being a “natural born Citizen”.
P.P.P.S. Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United States” to U.S. Constitutional standards. Read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)”. All “natural born Citizens” are “born Citizens (citizens at birth) but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ Also read the “Three Legged Stool Test” for Natural Born Citizen https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-constitutional-standards/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8

February 9, 2016

Sign the Petition: “Cuban Citizen at Birth” Marco Rubio is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President or VP

Sign the Petition and Mail Signed Copies of It to Local, State, and National Newspaper Editors and Members of the Electronic Media and Those in Elected Office.

Sign the Cuban Citizen Marco Rubio Petition Electronically by Clicking Here.  Or Download a PDF Copy and Print It Out to Mail or Fax or Use It as an Educational Handout at Political Events by Clicking Here.  For the Petition to Address Canadian-Born Citizen Ted Cruz’s Lack of Eligibility Click Here.

  “Cuban Citizen at Birth” Marco Rubio

is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President or VP

MarcoRubioWithCubanFlag

“Cuban Citizen at Birth” Marco Rubio
Is NOT Constitutionally Eligible

A PETITION FROM THE UNDERSIGNED

Recognizing that Marco Rubio is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States and is NOT constitutionally eligible to be President or Vice-President.

Whereas, as put into the Constitution of the United States in Article II Section 1 Clause 5 by our founding fathers and framers, it requires that to be eligible for the Office of the President and Commander in Chief of our military forces, a person alive at the time of the adoption of the Constitution had a “grandfather clause” therein, that said person only had to be a “Citizen” of the United States, but that in the future a person born after the adoption and ratification of our U.S. Constitution they had to be more than just a “Citizen” of the United States, but must be a “natural born Citizen” of the United States;

Whereas Marco Rubio was not alive at the time of the adoption of the U.S. Constitution and cannot avail himself of the “grandfather clause” therein available to only the original “Citizens” and therefore has to meet the more restrictive “natural born Citizen” clause;

Whereas the founders and framers considered in the summer of 1787 in an early draft of the Constitution to requiring the President to be simply only a “Citizen”, and then per Alexander Hamilton’s suggestions he proposed strengthening the requirement a bit more by requiring the person who would be a future President be “born a Citizen” for the presidential eligibility clause, the framers did not adopt either of those less restrictive citizenship terms as strong enough protection against “foreign influence”, but required instead at the written letter suggestion by John Jay (who became the 1st U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice) to George Washington that the future Presidents had to be a “natural born Citizen” to be the President and Commander in Chief as a “strong check” against “foreign influence” by birth upon a future President and Commander in Chief once the founding generation had passed;

Whereas the term “natural born Citizen”, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 is not specifically defined in the Constitution of the United States (since the Constitution does not include a glossary but was written in commonly understood language of that time as was explained in the Federalist Papers using language and terms that were clearly understood by them and the people of the USA who were called upon to adopt and ratify it), and thus we must look elsewhere outside the Constitution to what the people of founding and framing era understood said “natural born Citizen” term to mean (as such direction to do so is mentioned in the U.S. Supreme Court Case of (1875) Minor v Happersett), in order to determine its “originalist” meaning to those that chose that term and those that voted for and adopted and ratified the U.S. Constitution;

Whereas the Laws of Nature and Natural Law as evidenced by the Preamble of our Declaration of Independence strongly influenced our revolution and break away from England and the writing of our founding documents;

Whereas, per the preeminent legal treatise much read by the founders and framers, the “Principles of Natural Law” by Emer de Vattel (1758/1775/1797) and the colonial common law familiar to the founders and framers, they and the people of the founding and framing era understood that a “natural born Citizen” was a person born in the country to parents who were BOTH Citizens (born or naturalized Citizens as long as they are both Citizens) of the country when their child was born in the country, and that term was chosen as a future national security clause as a “strong check” against “foreign influence” by or at birth on the person who would be eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of our military forces once the founding generation had passed;

Whereas that Natural Law definition provided by Vattel’s founding era legal treatise was cited in the U.S. Supreme Court “Venus” case decision of 1814 in the citizenship discussion in that case as the best on citizenship and was quoted in that case, and that a person born in the country to parents who were both citizens (born or naturalized) when their child was born in the country were the facts at birth conferring “natural born Citizenship” on a person was cited in several subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Perkins v Elg, 307, U.S. 325 (1939) when the citizenship status of a party to a case was a key matter in determining a case before that court;

Whereas while Marco Rubio was clearly and admittedly born in the United States, he was born to a non-U.S. Citizen (Cuban Citizen) alien father and a non-U.S. Citizen (Cuban Citizen) alien mother who were legally in the United States under work permit visas, he was thus not born a U.S. “Citizen” per Natural Law;

Whereas whiles Cuba is a neighboring country and diplomatic relationships are currently being restored with it, Cuba has in the past been a very hostile neighbor, Cuba is a foreign country and is not part of the United States or its territorial jurisdictions;

Whereas because Marco Rubio was born in the United States to non-U.S. Citizen Cuban parents, that said Marco Rubio was thus born with dual-Citizenship, i.e., a “Citizen” of the United States due to his place of birth in the USA under generally interpreted jus soli rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court re the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, he was also born with “Cuban Citizenship at Birth”, which he inherited from his Cuban father and mothervia jus sanguinis Laws of Nature and the Constitution and Laws of Cuba;

Whereas Marco Rubio was born a Citizen of two sovereign countries and thus has birth allegiance to two countries at birth, he was thus born with “foreign influence” upon himself via citizenship at birth of more than one country and thus he was born with dual foreign allegiances, and has divided allegiances and national loyalties at and by birth, exactly what the founders and framers did NOT want for the person who would be President and Commander in Chief of our military forces in the future after the founding generation, the original “Citizens”, had passed away;

Whereas even though under the Wong King Ark (1898) ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution Marco Rubio is generally considered by the general public to be a 14th Amendment “born Citizen” of the United States because he was born in the United States to alien parents legally in the United States under work permit visas, Marco Rubio is definitely NOT a constitutional Article II Section 1 Clause 5 “natural born Citizen” of the United States;

Whereas Congress under its powers granted to it in the U.S. Constitution in Article I and the U.S. Supreme Court in the powers granted to it in the U.S. Constitution in Article III can only make persons “Citizens” by their acts and rulings, either by the person’s place and status at birth or after birth, subject to certain precedent and subsequent conditions and actions required that may exist and are outlined in said laws and court rulings, and that any law or congressional act or constitutional amendment in effect at this time, which Marco Rubio may point to (past or present) to try and claim eligibility, that said law, court ruling, or constitutional amendment, can only make him a “Citizen” of the United States at birth and not a constitutional Article II “natural born Citizen” of the United States at birth. Adjectives mean something;

Therefore, be it declared by the undersigned;

That Marco Rubio is NOT a “natural born Citizen” under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States and is NOT constitutionally eligible to be President or Vice-President.

 

SIGN THE PETITION

First Name: ____________________    Last Name: ____________________________

City: ___________________ State: _____  ZIP: _______   Date: _____________

Are More Pages Attached With More Signatures? YES [ ]     NO [ ]

If [YES] Checked Fill In Number of Pages of Signatures Attached: [   ]

# # # #

For additional information about the history of the founders and framers selection of the term “natural born Citizen” for inclusion in the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court legal case law re who is a “natural born Citizen”, and thus further detailing why Marco Rubio is NOT a “natural born Citizen”, read the information at the following websites: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html and   https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/senator-marco-rubios-lack-of-natural-born-citizenship-update-27-may-2011-see-pdf-copy-of-the-sep-1975-petition-for-naturalization-for-mario-rubio-father-of-senator-marco-rubio-who-was-born-in-may/     cfk:09Feb2016-Ver-7

Download and Print a Copy of the Above Petition at the Following Link. Sign Copies and Mail Them to Newspaper Editors, National Media Persons, and Your Elected Officials. Let Them Hear From You! Spread the Word:  http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/petition-marcorubionotnaturalborncitizen.pdf

CDR Charles Kerchner (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org

Marco Rubio Fails Three Legged Stool Test for "natural born Citizen". Click on Image for Details.

Marco Rubio Fails Three Legged Stool Test for “natural born Citizen”. His Parents Not U.S. Citizens. Click on Image for Details.

P.S. Here is a chart which lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution.
P.P.S. Being a “born Citizen” or “Citizen at Birth” is not identically the same as a being a “natural born Citizen”.
P.P.P.S. Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United States” to U.S. Constitutional standards. Read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)”. All “natural born Citizens” are “born Citizens (citizens at birth) but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ Also read the “Three Legged Stool Test” for Natural Born Citizen https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-constitutional-standards/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8

January 22, 2016

Via Liberty Born: NEW EVIDENCE: Intent of 1790 Naturalization Act and Why It Was Totally Repealed as in Error

Click on image for more details constitutional term "natural born Citizen"

Click on image for more details constitutional term “natural born Citizen”

Via Liberty Born:  NEW EVIDENCE: Intent of 1790 Naturalization Act and Why It Was Totally Repealed as in Error: https://libertyborn.wordpress.com/2014/12/29/new-evidence-1790-naturalization-act/

A Defective and In Error and Totally Repealed Law Should Not and Can Not be Used to Legally Justify the Constitutional Eligibility of Anyone to be President and/or Vice-President of the United States.

Read this excellent essay and lesson from history and how the political hack attorneys of both political parties and the Congressional Research Service are deceiving Congress and the world by using a REPEALED and defective Naturalization Law to try and make a false point about who really is a “natural born Citizen” of the United States. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Barack Obama are NATURALIZED “Citizens” by statutory/positive law and are NOT “natural born Citizens” per Natural Law. They are not constitutionally eligible to serve as either President or Vice-President.  Read how the person considered to be the author of the U.S. Constitution James Madison communicated via letter to Thomas Jefferson about the defects in that 1790 first law/act of the first Congress and the need to totally REPEAL it via the 3rd Congress in 1795.  George Washington was the President in both cases and signed the 1795 Naturalization Act total REPEALING the 1790 Act, and thus any legal force it had is “annulled”, i.e., like the 1790 Act never existed, and thus it cannot ever be used for any legal purpose.  And as to inferring any intent of the founders and framers as to their understanding of the meaning of “natural born Citizen” in Article II of our U.S. Constitution as to who can be President and Commander in Chief of our military forces, the two Naturalization Acts (and the discussion by the of why they REPEALED the defective 1790 Naturalization Act) must be considered in concert:   https://libertyborn.wordpress.com/2014/12/29/new-evidence-1790-naturalization-act/

.

ted-cruz-fails-three-legged-nbc-stool-test (missing 2 legs & falling over)

Ted Cruz Cannot Stand for President or Vice-President. He is Missing Two Legs!

Read this essay by CDR Kerchner (Ret) about Ted Cruz’s deliberate deception and why Ted is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States to constitutional standards.  Ted Cruz is missing two legs:  https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2016/01/17/ted-cruz-fails-three-legged-stool-test/ … AND …  https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/

Read this essay by Article II constitutional expert Atty Mario Apuzzo on the difference between being born a basic “Citizen” of the United States and being born a “natural born Citizen” of the United States:  http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2015/11/a-citizen-is-one-thing-but-natural-born.html

Here is the link to the full text of the 1790 Naturalization Act and full text of the 1795 Naturalization Act which totally REPEALED and REPLACED the faulty 1790 Naturalization Act.  See:  http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the constitutional term in the presidential eligibility clause “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

January 17, 2016

Ted Cruz Fails Three Legged Stool Test – Ted Cruz is Missing Two Legs! – He Cannot Constitutionally Stand for Pres or VP – The Three Legged Stool Test for “natural born Citizen” – Cruz is “A Bridge Too Far”

Click on image for the “originalist” and true understanding and intent of “natural born Citizen” of the United States

For more click on the image for the correct definition of "natural born Citizen of the United States"

For more click on the image for the correct definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ of the United States

Ted Cruz Fails Three Legged Stool Test for “Natural Born Citizen“.  He Cannot Constitutionally Stand for President or VP.  Ted Cruz is Missing Two Legs! – The Three Legged Stool Test & Analogy for “natural born Citizen” of the United States to Constitutional Standards as It Applies to Who Can be President and Commander-in-Chief of Our Military.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada (minus one leg) to a Cuban National father (minus the 2nd leg).

Ted Cruz is NOT constitutionally eligible and has abandoned his constitutional “originalist” standing and is pushing the “natural born Citizen” eligibility envelope, meaning, and originalism understanding of that constitutional term … “A Bridge Too Far”!

A “natural born Citizen” of the United States is a child born with Sole Allegiance and Unity of Citizenship at birth to one and only one country — the USA, i.e., a child born in the USA of two (2) U.S. Citizens. The parents can be Citizens by Birth or they can be Citizens by Naturalization later in life after immigrating to the USA. But to create a “natural born Citizen” of the United States both parents must be Citizens at the time the child is born in the USA. See this legal reference book used by the founders and framers of our Constitution: Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law, Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212, Emer de Vattel, 1758-1797. The overwhelming majority (probably 85%+) of citizens in the United States are natural born Citizens. This clause was added for future presidents as a national security clause. It is from the group of natural born Citizens that our founders prescribed in the presidential eligibility clause in Clause 5, Section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution that we shall choose a President and Commander in Chief of our military as a strong check against foreign influence via birth allegiances on the person in that singular and most powerful office. One needs all three citizenship legs to be a natural born Citizen and have sole allegiance and claim on you at birth to one and only one country — the United States: 1. Born in the USA. 2. Father must be a U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). 3. Mother must be U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). Like a three legged stool if you take away any of these three citizenship legs of the Article II constitutional intent and requirement to being a natural born Citizen, i.e., being born with unity of citizenship in and sole allegiance to the USA, the child is born with more than one country’s citizenship and claim of allegiance/citizenship on them at their birth and thus they are NOT a natural born Citizen of the United States.

In this test and analogy of a stool designed to stand on three legs and if it is missing a leg, it falls down, likewise the person’s claim to ‘natural born Citizenship’ fails if the person does not have all three citizenship legs required to be a natural born Citizen at the time of their birth. See the below Venn Diagram which logically and graphically shows how a natural born Citizen has the intersection and unity of all three Citizenship statuses at birth. Read this essay “ Of Trees and Plants” on basic logic which explains that being simply a “Citizen at Birth (CAB)” does not necessarily make oneself a “natural born Citizen (NBC) at Birth”. Natural born Citizens are overwhelmingly the largest subset of all American citizens. The location of birth being in the U.S. to a U.S. father and U.S. mother … all being U.S. Citizens at the time of birth is the only way one achieves natural born Citizenship status. Natural born Citizenship is gained by the laws of nature not by any man-made law or statute or even a constitutional amendment granting that status. Natural born Citizens need no act of man for their Citizenship was created by nature and nature’s Creator. Natural born Citizens of the United States have sole allegiance to one and only one country at birth … the United States. No foreign power or country can claim their allegiance under U.S. law or the Law of Nations. Over 85% of American citizens fit that requirement, i.e., born in the USA of two U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized) parents. Natural born citizens are the 3 Leaf Clovers of the American citizens, Not the 4 Leaf Clovers. It is from those 85% of American citizens that our founders and framers directed us via Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution that we shall choose our President and Commander-in-Chief, not a dual-citizen son of a foreign national and British Subject father who was never even an immigrant to this country, and said child being born a British subject himself via his foreign national father, as is the case with Obama’s birth status.  Nor for the case of Ted Cruz who was born in Canada (and thus is a Canadian citizen by birth) to a foreign national Cuban father (and thus also a Cuban citizen by birth).  Cruz and Obama were born with multiple allegiances and citizenships at birth.  Neither are a “natural born Citizen” of the United States and neither is eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief of our Military.

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art "natural born Citizen"

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art “natural born Citizen”

More historical and legal papers and analysis on the true constitutional meaning and intent of the founders and framers of the presidential eligibility clause, natural born Citizen, in our U.S. Constitution can be found at this link: http://www.scribd.com/collections/3301209/

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/

P.S. Also read — Redux for People Seeking Constitutionally Eligible Presidential Candidates: http://www.scribd.com/doc/160107354/Natural-Born-Citizen-3-Not-4-Leaf-Clover-Type-of-Citizenship

P.P.S. Also read this essay regarding the constitutional term in the presidential eligibility clause “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

ProtectOurLiberty WebsiteSpaceMy BlogSpaceDocs Collections Re Obama SpaceMy YouTube SpaceMost Recent Full Pg Ad SpaceAd Archives SpaceFliers/Handouts SpaceBlock Ads SpaceSheriff to Sheriffs – Sheriff Kit Project SpaceGet A Sheriff Kit SpaceInterviews-Audio/Print SpaceBooks SpaceGoat’s Ledge SpaceContact Me

January 16, 2016

A New CRS Memo re Qualifications for President and Natural Born Citizen Clause – 2016 Version

Click image to learn more about "natural born Citizen"

Click image to learn more about “natural born Citizen”

A New CRS Memo re Qualifications for President and Natural Born Citizen Clause – 2016 Version – Misquotes Key Laws Once Again.

Yet Another One from the Duplicitous Political Attorney Maskell of the Politically Party Controlled Congressional Research Service (CRS). What is This, Maskell’s 4th or 5th Try at Disinformation as to the Founders and Framers Understanding and Intent When They Wrote the Constitution? How Will This One Affect Ted Cruz’s Constitutional Eligibility?  Did Mitch McConnell Request This Update?  Did the Congressional Research Service Once Again Ignore the Influence of Emer de Vattel and Principles of Natural Law on the Founders of Our Nation and Framers of Our Founding Documents as We Broke Away from England. Vattel’s Writings on Natural Law is the Source of the “natural born Citizen” Term and Its Meaning.

Does This New CRS Memo Tell the Readers that the Often Touted 1790 Naturalization Act was Totally Repealed as an Error Containing First Attempt at a Naturalization Law?  The Total Repeal of This First Error Ridden Naturalization Law was Instigated via the Efforts of Madison and Jefferson, and was Totally Replaced by a new Corrected Naturalization Law Signed by George Washington – the 1795 Naturalization Act – Which Removed All Mention of the Term Natural Born Citizen Since Congress Only Has Naturalization Powers and Cannot Create Natural Born Citizens Who Can Only be Created by Natural Law and the Laws of Nature. These Key Founders and Framers Realized the First Congress Made an Error with the 1790 Law and Totally Repealed It. They Did Not Amend it Or Try to Fix It – They Working with the 3rd Congress Totally Repealed and Replaced It as a Bad First Attempt at a Naturalization Law.

Also see This Below Linked Site re the 1934 Naturalization Law Change for ‘Children Born Abroad’ where Only the Mother was a U.S. Citizen, as is the Case for Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz Would Not be a Citizen at All if Born Prior to 1934. Ted Cruz is a Naturalized ‘Citizen’ at Birth by Act of Congress Under Its Naturalization Powers per Congressional Acts and Statutory Laws and Not a ‘Natural Born Citizen‘ at Birth per Natural Law and Constitutional Standards.  Adjectives Means Something. See This re 1934 Naturalization Law Changes:  http://www.americanlaw.com/citabrd.html

Read the new 2016 CRS report on presidential eligibility and/or download a copy here:  https://www.scribd.com/doc/295707413/New-CRS-Memo-re-Qualifications-for-President-and-the-Natural-Born-Citizenship-Eligibility-Requirement-Congressional-Research-Service-R42097-2016

And let us not forget via a blast from the past about the top secret 1st CRS Memo circulated secretly starting in the early spring of 2009 among members of Congress to tell Members of Congress what to tell their constituents when asked about Obama’s lack of eligibility before the secret memo was exposed in 2010 via the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al lawsuit:  http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/11/members-of-congress-memo-what-to-tell.html  and  https://www.scribd.com/doc/41131059/CRS-Congressional-Internal-Memo-What-to-Tell-Your-Constituents-Regarding-Obama-Eligibility-Questions

Read my essay on logic, adjectives, and common sense which totally rebuts the CRS Memo’s conflation of the two terms “Citizen at Birth” and “natural born Citizen” — a “Citizen” at birth is not logically identically equal to a “natural born Citizen” at birth.  Adjectives mean something and modify the noun as to unique characteristics and type and how it was obtained.  Compare the terms “natural born” Citizen and “naturalized” Citizen.  Adjectives convey special meaning to the the term. Being a Citizen at birth tells you WHEN they person became a Citizen but not HOW they became a Citizen.  Were they Citizens by Natural Law or by Man-Made, Statutory, Positive Law or Acts. Adjectives mean something. Any legal term with the adjective “natural” in front of the noun denotes it came from natural origins and the laws of nature and not of man-made creation/statutory laws.  Congress can make all the Citizens it wants, either “at birth” or later as adults.  But only the facts at birth per the Laws of Nature and Natural Law can create a “natural born Citizen” at birth, i.e., a person born in the country to parents who were both Citizens (born or naturalized) of that country.  The CRS Memo writer is deliberately conflating two terms as being logically identically the same, i.e., “natural born Citizen” and “Citizen at birth” and is trying to deceive the American Electorate and to provide cover for the Members of Congress to do nothing to live up to their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution:  https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/

My comment: Despite what any politically controlled Congress and their politically inspired Congressional Research Service memo puts out,  neither Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio who are two active candidates [and the candidate Jindal whose campaign is in suspension] were at birth born to two U.S. Citizen parents in the USA and thus all three are NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States with sole allegiance at birth to only the USA. Each of the above were born with citizenship in more than one country and thus have divided allegiance and foreign influences on them by and at birth. No matter what you think of their politics, like them or not, they are NOT constitutionally eligible for the office they seek. Obama has shown us what one can get when one allows a person with divided allegiances via birth into the Oval Office. The “natural born Citizen” clause in our Constitution is a national security clause and must be defended and upheld as originally understood and intended. We must defend the Constitution no matter which political party seeks to subvert it – CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret).

# # # #

constitution-with-flag-background.jpg

For the true Originalist understanding and meaning of “natural born Citizen” click on the image

A Lesson from History. Is Being Born a Citizen (Citizen at/by Birth) of the United States of Sufficient Citizenship Status to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of Our Military? The Founders and Framers Emphatically Decided … No, It Was Not!

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., P.E. (Retired)

During the process of developing a new U.S. Constitution Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft for a Constitution on June 18, 1787. At some point, he also suggested to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military. Another version of Hamilton’s proposed Constitution and which principles were stated during the convention’s deliberations per Madison notes and journal (see work of Farrand – pg 619), was given to Madison near the close of the convention for inclusion in Madison record of events for the convention. Hamilton’s proposed Constitution was not accepted.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

“No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.”

Many of the founders and framers rightly had a fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future be President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. The President was also to be the Commander in Chief of the military. This fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was particularly strongly felt by John Jay, who later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He felt so strongly about the issue of potential foreign influence that he took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements. John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s treatise on Natural Law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” or “born a Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word natural goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents, both of them, when their child is born, as per natural law.

The below is the relevant proposed change language from Jay’s letter which he proposed to strengthen the citizenship requirements in Article II and to require more than just being a “born Citizen” of the United States to serve as a future Commander in Chief and President.

John Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington dated 25 Jul 1787:

“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen. “

See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link. This letter from Jay was written on July 25, 1787. General Washington passed on the recommendation from Jay to the convention and it was adopted in the final draft and was accepted adding the adjective “natural” making it “natural born Citizen of the United States” for future Presidents and Commanders in Chief of the military, rather than Hamilton’s proposed “born a Citizen”. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 Sep 1787:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s proposed principles for a Constitution and a presidential citizenship eligibility requirement therein requiring that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. See Madison’s comment in his journal of the convention re this fact in which it reports as follows: ” … Copy of a paper Communicated to J. M. by Col. Hamilton, about the close of the Convention in Philada. 1787, which he said delineated the Constitution which he would have wished to be proposed by the Convention: He had stated the principles of it in the course of the deliberations. …” — 3 Max Farrand, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 619-630 (1911) – page 619. But that citizenship status for who could be President was rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay via George Washington, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of the person with foreign influence or allegiances or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military. No person having any foreign influence or claim of allegiance on them at birth could serve as a future President. The person must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth.

Jay’s proposal and recommended clause added the additional adjective of “natural” before simply being a “born Citizen” which was proposed by Hamilton. And that word and adjective “natural” means something special from the laws of nature that modifies just being born a Citizen of the USA such as being simply born on the soil of the United States. Natural means from nature by the facts of nature of one’s birth. Not created retroactively after the fact by a man-made law. A natural born Citizen needs no man-made law to bestow Citizenship on them. The added adjective “natural” comes from Natural Law which is recognized the world over as universal law and which is the foundation of the Law of Nations which was codified by Vattel in 1758 in his preeminent legal treatise used by the founders, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. In Vol.1 Chapter 19 of Vattel’s Law of Nations, the “Des citoyens et naturels“, Vattel in Section 212 explains to us (the French term “naturels” was translated to English in 1781 in the Journal of the Continental Congress and in the 1797 English edition of Vattel), to tell us that the “natural born Citizens” are those born in the country to parents (plural) who are Citizens of the country when their child is born. These are the natural Citizens of the nation per universal principles of natural law for which no man-made law is necessary to explain or justify. Such a person, a natural born Citizen, is born with unity of Citizenship and sole allegiance at birth due to having been both born on the soil AND being born to two Citizen parents. The person who would be President must be a second generation American with no foreign claims of allegiance on them at birth under the law of nations and natural law, the child of two Citizens and born in the USA. This is a much stronger check to foreign influence than simply being born a Citizen say on the soil of the USA but with one or the other parent being a foreigner, such as is the case of Obama. The situation with Obama’s birth Citizenship status is exactly the problem that the founders and framers did not want. They did not want the child of a foreign national, non-U.S. citizen serving as President and Commander of our military. This was a national security concern to them. And it is a national security concern now.

Another founder of our nation and great historian of the American Revolution named David Ramsay contemporaneously defined in a 1789 essay what the term “natural born Citizen” means. Read a copy of Ramsay’s original dissertation at this link. Other research papers from history on the term “natural born Citizen” published long before the current controversy was created by the 2008 election debacle can be read at this link. The paper by Breckenridge Long in 1916 is a particularly good one.

The current defacto president and unconstitutional occupier of the Oval Office Barack Hussein Obama II may or may not be a born Citizen of the USA depending on what the 1961 contemporaneous birth registration documents sealed in Hawaii reveal. And Americans have good reason to be greatly concerned about the truth as to where he was physically born as opposed to where his birth may have been falsely registered by his maternal grandmother as occurring in Hawaii as this Catalog of Evidence details. But he can never be a “natural born Citizen of the United States” since his father was a foreigner, a British Subject who was never a U.S. Citizen and was not even an immigrant to the USA. Since his father was a British Subject and not a U.S. Citizen when Obama was born, Obama was born a British Subject. The founders and framers are probably rolling over in their graves knowing this person was sworn in as the putative President and Commander of our military.

Ted Cruz was born a citizen of Canada due his birth in Canada to a Cuban father. Marco Rubio was born a citizen of Cuba due to his birth to two Cuban national parents when he was born. And Bobby Jindal was born a citizen of India due to his birth to parents who were citizens of India when he was born. Thus all three were born with citizenship in more than one country and divided allegiances at birth.

The founders rejected acquisition of Citizenship by birth on the soil without consideration as to who were the parents. That is clear from the history and evolution of the writing the eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, which specifies who can be President and Commander in Chief of the military.

So, is a person who is simply being declared “born a Citizen” at/by birth by STATUTORY LAWS passed at some point in time by Congress, and liberalized more and more from time to time by Congress, per its “Naturalization Powers” permitted constitutionally to be President of the USA? The answer is a resounding NO per the founders and framers. Being a “born Citizen the United States” is a necessary but NOT sufficient part of being a “natural born Citizen of the United States”. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ Only a “natural born Citizen” can be the President of the USA and Commander in Chief of our military. Obama is NOT a natural born Citizen of the USA and is thus constitutionally not eligible (to constitutional standards) to serve as President and Commander in Chief of the military. And the same goes for Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal.

SBTP Dolly Madison Quote du Jour: “The Constitution was signed September 17, 1787, by 39 brave men who changed the world.”

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

P.S. Here is a chart which lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution.
P.P.S. Being a “born Citizen” or “Citizen at Birth” is not identically the same as a being a “natural born Citizen”.
P.P.P.S. Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United States” to U.S. Constitutional standards. Read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)”. All “natural born Citizens” are “born Citizens (citizens at birth) but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ Also read the “Three Legged Stool Test” for Natural Born Citizen https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-constitutional-standards/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,385 other followers

%d bloggers like this: